The field of this invention is apparatus and methods for playing live table playing card games; namely, games which use playing cards and are played at a casino, cardroom, residential or other gaming table with live human participants.
In the gaming industry there is a significant volume of gambling which occurs at live table games which use playing cards. Exemplary live table games include blackjack, poker, baccarat, and others. There is also a number of proprietary or specialty live table card games which have developed, such as pai-gow poker, Let-It-Ride(trademark), Caribbean Stud(trademark) and others. These and many other games all involve play using playing cards. The use of playing cards has a number of associated limitations and disadvantages which have long plagued the casino industry. Some of these are of general concern to all or most playing card games. Others are problems associated with the use of playing cards in particular games. Some of the principal concerns and problems are discussed below.
The use of playing cards at live table games typically involves several operational requirements which are time-consuming. These operations are conveniently described as collecting, shuffling and dealing of the cards. In many card games there is also a step of cutting the deck after it has been shuffled.
In the collecting operation a dealer typically collects the cards just played at the end of a hand of play. This is done in preparation for playing the next hand of cards. The cards are best collected so all are in a face-down or face-up condition. The cards also are typically straightened into a stack with the long sides and short sides aligned. These manipulations take time and are not typically appreciated by either the dealer or players as enhancing the play and entertainment value of the game.
In many games the cards collected at the end of the hand are deposited in a discard rack which collects the played cards until the time a new stack is obtained or the stack is shuffled. In some games the cards are immediately shuffled into the stack either manually or using a shuffling machine. More typically, the cards are collected and then shuffling is performed later by the dealer.
When shuffling is needed, it involves a break in the action of the table game and consumes a significant amount of time. Shuffling is also the most time consuming operation in preparing for the next hand. Thus, shuffling is of substantial financial significance to the casino industry because it requires significant time and reduces the number of hands which can be played per hour or other period of time. The earnings of casinos is dependent upon the number of hands played. Since many casinos are open on a 24-hour basis, earnings are limited by the number of hands that can be played per hour. Thus, there is a significant and keen interest by casino owners to develop practices which allow more games to be played in a given amount of time. Accomplishing this without detracting from the players enjoyment and desire to play the game is a challenging and longstanding issue with casino owners and consultants in the gaming industry.
An additional consideration in the casino industry is the costs associated with shuffling machines. Shuffling machines currently available have costs in the thousands of dollars. Such machines save time in performing the shuffling process, but still require time to load, operate and unload. These factors reduce the savings associated with reduced shuffling time and effort. Further reductions in the costs and time associated with shuffling of cards is still desired.
The amount of time consumed by collecting, shuffling and dealing is also of significance in private card games because it also delays action and requires some special effort to perform. In private games there is also some added complexity due to card players remembering or figuring out who previously dealt and who should now shuffle and re-deal the cards as needed.
In addition to the time delay and added activity needed to collect, shuffle and deal cards, there is typically some time devoted to cutting the deck of cards which have been shuffled and which are soon to be dealt. This traditional maneuver helps to reduce the risk that the dealer who has shuffled the cards may have done so in a way that stacks the deck in an ordered fashion which may favor the dealer or someone else playing the game. Although cutting the deck does not require a large amount of time, it does take some time. The amount of time spent on cutting reduces the frequency at which hands of the card game can be played.
The above and related considerations clearly demonstrate that a substantial amount of time is consumed by collecting, shuffling, cutting and dealing playing cards. The casino industry has long felt the desire to reduce the time spent and increase play of live table games.
In the gaming industry there is also a very significant amount of time and effort devoted to security issues which relate to play of the casino games. Part of the security concerns stem from frequent attempts to cheat during play of the games. Attempts to cheat are made by players, dealers, or more significantly by dealers and players in collusion. This cheating seeks to affect the outcome of the game in a way which favors the dealer or players who are working together. The amount of cheating in card games is significant to the casino industry and constitutes a major security problem which has large associated losses and for which very large and costly expenditures are made on a daily basis in an effort to prevent such cheating.
Many of the attempts to cheat in the play of live table card games involve some aspect of dealer manipulation of cards during collection, shuffling, cutting or dealing of cards. Thus, there is a need for methods and apparatuses which can be used in the play of live table card games which reduces the ability of the dealer and/or players to cheat by manipulation of playing cards. Of greatest concern are schemes whereby the deck is stacked and the stacked deck is used to the collusive player""s advantage. Stacked decks represent huge potential losses since the player is aware of the cards which will be played before play occurs and can optimize winnings by increasing bets for winning hands and decreasing bets for losing hand.
Casinos have recognized that their efforts to reduce cheating would be improved if the casino had comprehensive information on the cards which have been played, the amounts bet, the players and dealers involved and other information about actions which have taken place at the card tables. This is of particular importance in assessing the use of stacked decks. It is also important where card tracking is occurring. Additional explanation about card tracking is discussed below. The information desired by the casinos includes knowing the sequence and exact cards being dealt.
Some attempts have been made to record card game action. The best current technology involves cameras which are mounted above the tables to record the action of the card games. This approach is disadvantaged by the fact that not all cards dealt are easily known from a camera position above the table because some or all of the cards are not dealt face-up, or are hidden by overlying cards. Although many blackjack games are sufficiently revealing to later determine the order of dealt cards, others are not. Other card games, such as poker, have hands which are not revealed. The covered cards of the players do not allow the order of dealt cards to be ascertained from an above-table camera.
Even where above-table cameras are used, their use may not be effective. Such cameras may require time-consuming and tedious human analysis to go over the video tapes or other recordings of table action. This human study may be needed just to ascertain the sequence of cards dealt or to determine the amount of betting. Such human analysis is costly and cannot economically be used to routinely monitor all action in a casino cardroom. It is also required because there is no current way for easily ascertaining whether the dealer or player won the hand, such as in a blackjack game. It is typically not possible to discern the indicia number or letter presented in the corner of the playing card when viewed in a recorded video tape. Counting the individual pips in the center field of the playing cards can be done; however, it cannot be done in all situations with the desired reliability. This is true because cards may be partly or totally covered by another overlying card contained in the same hand, leading to missing information or mistaken interpretations. Thus, the video camera monitoring techniques have only found very limited effectiveness as a routine approach for identifying cheating. There has also been relatively limited use as a serious analytical tool because of the difficulty of analysis. Such camera surveillance techniques are also of only limited effectiveness as a deterrent because many of the people involved with cheating have a working knowledge of their limitations and utilize approaches which are not easily detectible by such systems.
Another use of video camera monitoring and recording has been made in the context of analyzing card table action after someone has become a suspect. The tape recordings serve as evidence to prove the cheating scheme. However, in the past, this has generally required other evidence to initially reveal the cheating so that careful analysis can be performed. More routine and general screening to detect cheating has remained a difficult and continuing problem for casinos.
Another approach to reducing security problems utilizes card shoes having card detection capability. Card shoes hold a stack of cards containing typically from one to six decks of cards. The cards are held in the card shoe in preparation for dealing and to secure the deck within a device which restricts access to the cards and helps prevent card manipulations. Card shoes can be fit with optical or magnetic sensors which detect the cards as they are being dealt. Some of the problems of security analysis using above-table cameras is reduced when the sequence of cards dealt can be directly determined at the card shoe using optical or magnetic sensors.
One advantage of such card shoes is that the card sequence information can be collected in a machine readable format by sensing the specific nature (suit and count) of each card as they are dealt out of the card shoe. However, most such card shoes have special requirements for the cards being used. Such cards must carry magnetic coding or are specifically adapted for optical reading. This increases the cost of the cards and may not fully resolve the problems and difficulties in obtaining accurate information concerning sequence information.
The automated data collecting card shoes also do not have an inherent means for collecting data on the assignment of the card to a particular player or the dealer. They further do not collect data on the amounts bet. These factors thus require some other manual or partially automated data collection system to be used, or require that time-consuming human analysis be performed using video tapes as explained above.
An additional issue which has continued to be a concern in the casino industry relates to the use of automated shuffling machines. Prior automated shuffling machines have not demonstrated a sufficient ability to thwart highly skilled gamblers. Such gamblers have demonstrated an ability either by human intellect and training, or with the aid of computers, to determine information about the decks being dealt. This information is typically derived from information collected concerning the preceding hand or hands of play. Armed with such information, the skilled gamblers track a specific sequence or multiple sequences or groupings of cards within a deck or large stack. Tracking is often done for a group of cards forming part of a stack rather than an entire stack. These techniques in card tracking can significantly shift the advantage from the casino to a skilled gambler. Prior card shuffling machines all show a weakness in that skilled gamblers can observe operation of the machines and in many situations make predictions which serve as a means for card tracking.
The use in blackjack of numerous card decks, such as six decks, has been one strategy directed at minimizing the risk of card tracking. Such tracking should be contrasted with card counting strategies which are typically less accurate and do not pose as substantial a risk of loss to the casino. Use of numerous card decks in a stack along with proper cut card placement can also reduce the risk of effective card counting. However, it has been found that multiple decks are not sufficient to overcome the skilled gambler""s ability to track cards and turn the advantage against the house.
Card tracking can be thought of as being of two types. Sequential card tracking involves determination of the specific ordering of the card deck or decks being dealt. This can be determined or closely estimated for runs of cards, sequences of cards forming a portion or portions of a stack. Sequential card tracking can be devastating to a casino since a player taking advantage of such information can bet large in a winning situation and change the odds in favor of the player and against the casino.
Slug tracking involves determining runs of the deck or stack which show a higher frequency of certain important cards. For example, in the play of blackjack there are a relatively large number of 10-count cards. These 10-count cards are significant in producing winning blackjack hands or 20-count hands which are also frequently winning hands. Gamblers who are proficient in tracking slugs containing large numbers of 10-count cards can gain an advantage over the house and win in blackjack.
There is also a long-standing problem in the play of blackjack which concerns the situation when the dealer receives a blackjack hand in the initial two cards dealt. If the dealer has a 10-count card or ace as the upcard, then it is possible for the dealer to have a blackjack. If the dealer does have a blackjack, then there is no reason to play the hand out since the outcome of the hand is already determined without further dealing. If the hand is fully played out, and the dealer then reveals that the dealer has received a blackjack hand, then a significant amount of time has been wasted. It also causes players to often be upset when a hand is played out to no avail.
In many casinos the waste of time associated with playing out hands with a winning dealer blackjack has lead to various approaches which attempt to end the hand after the initial deal. Some of these allow the dealer to look at the down card to make a determination whether a blackjack hand has been dealt to the dealer. This looking is commonly called xe2x80x9cpeekingxe2x80x9d and is an operation which has been the source of numerous cheating schemes involving dealers and players who work in collusion.
In such cheating associated with peeking at the down card, the dealer cheats in collaboration with an accomplice-player. This cheating is frequently accomplished when the dealer signals the accomplice using eye movements, hand movements or other signals. If a dealer does not peek, then he does not know the value of his hand until after the players have completed their play. If the dealer does peek, then he can use such eye movements, hand movements or other techniques to convey instructions to his accomplice-player. These signals tell the accomplice what hand the dealer has been dealt. With this knowledge of the dealer""s hand, the accomplice has improved odds of winning and this can be sufficient to turn the long-term odds in favor of the accomplice-player and against the casino.
Because of this potential for cheating, peeking as a normal procedure in the play of blackjack has been viewed with disfavor by many casinos. Some casinos which have experienced losses due to such cheating have eliminated the peeking procedure and decided to instead incur the waste of time and problems associated with playing out the hand of cards.
There has also been a substantial number of apparatuses devised to facilitate the peeking procedure or render it less subject to abuse. Such peeking devices are intended to allow determination of whether the dealer has received a blackjack hand; however, this is done without revealing to the dealer what the down card is unless it makes a blackjack. Some of these devices require a special table with a peeking device installed in the table. Others allow the down card to be reviewed using a table top device in which the card is inserted. These systems and others involve the use of special playing cards. These devices and methods generally add greater costs and slow the play of the game in a way which often offsets the original intent of saving the time of playing out possible dealer blackjack hands. The prior attempts have often ended up unacceptable and are removed. This problem has nagged the casino industry for many years and a fully acceptable solution has never been found.
Another notable problem suffered by live table games is the intimidation which many novice or less experienced players feel when playing such games. Surveys have indicated that many new or less experienced people who come to a casino are inclined to play slot machines and video card games. These people feel intimidation at a live table game because such games require quick thinking and decision making while other people are watching and waiting. This intimidation factor reduces participation in table games.
The intimidation factor experienced by many in connection with live table games has had a very significant effect on casinos and the games offered in the casinos. About 20 years ago, live table games constituted approximately two-thirds of the casino business, with slot machines being the remaining one-third. Now it is just the opposite, with two-thirds of the business being in slot machines and similar single person gaming machines while live table games constitute only one-third of the business. Since betting at live table games is generally larger, this development is something of a disadvantage to the casinos as compared to the same persons participating in a live table game. Efforts to stem or reverse this trend using specialty table games with different play and larger jackpots have not been effective or of only temporary beneficial effect. Some of the efforts have produced fads or other temporary increases in interest levels but the overall effect has not had a long-term benefit. Thus, there is a need for improved live table games which reduce the intimidation factor and enhance the ease with which a player adopts play of such games. There is also need for live table games which provide satisfaction to those who play, such that repeat participation is improved.
A further problem associated with live table card games are the costs associated with purchasing, handling and disposal of paper and plastic playing cards. Casinos pay relatively favorable prices for card decks, but the decks roughly cost about $1 per deck at this time. Each casino uses decks for a very limited period of time, typically only one shift, and almost always less than one day. After this relatively brief life in the limelight, the decks are disposed of in a suitable manner. In some cases they can be sold as souvenirs. This is done after the cards are specially marked or portions are punched out to show they have been decommissioned from a casino. This allows the cards to be sold as souvenirs while reducing the risk that they will later be used at the card tables in a cheating scheme which involves slipping a winning card into play at an appropriate point. In other cases the playing cards are simply destroyed or recycled to eliminate this last risk. In any case, the cost of playing cards for a casino is significant and can easily run in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
In addition to the above problems, there are also a significant cost associated with handling and storing the new and worn playing cards. Sizable rooms contained in the casino complexes are needed just to store the cards as they are coming and going. Thus, the high costs of casino facilities further exacerbates the costs associated with paper and plastic playing cards.
These and other considerations have been partially or fully addressed by the current invention which is described more fully below. Additional benefits and advantages of the current invention will be given in the following description, or will be apparent from the nature of the invention.